If I was a betting man I'd say the "pet lip" was BM's for not picking him when he said he was off and not signing a new contract.

Total baseless speculation of course, like most of my posts

Don't see it myself.

I too would love to be in Aus, with or without my brother, it would be great. But my job is here and I don't have the time to upsticks.

I would also love to be where ever Cheryl Cole is, but again I don't think it would work.

People don't always get their desires, infact they very rarely do. Just because someone desires something does not mean it will happen.




So many made up statments there Gareth, was it to suit an agenda?

You have nothing to back up that we offered him a new contract. You have nothing to back up that he turned down a new contract.

But he did get a sniff at the first team and was far from "marquee"

If Luke Burgess wants to go to Australia and isn't really that bothered about whether he plays in the NRL or in some semi-pro lower grade, what's to stop him (visa conditions not withstanding)?

Irrespective of whether Leeds have or haven't offered him a new deal or not, in the age of freedom of contract all the leverage lies with the player. If he decides the grass is greener somewhere else, there's sod all the club can do about it once his contract is up.

I can't see how anyone can seriously argue that isn't the case?

What we've got here is two players on the fringes of the first team who have been told they can go elsewhere to get first team rugby. Excuse me if I don't regard it as some major disaster from which the club will never recover.

I would guess that Luke decided a long time ago that he wanted to go to Aus and to not renew his Leeds contract.

If Leeds did offer him a new contract he has obviously turned it down.

I like him and think he's a good player but him not playing for us for the rest of this year will not change the outcome of the season for the Leeds Rhinos.

Maybe GH wants to concentrate on a more long term replacement for Luke and that's why he's available now?

Good luck to him I hope he does well in Aus but I expect the Aussies will be expecting another Sam and get Matthew not Andrew (Johns)

Rats leaving a sinking ship?

Who is arguing that?

But back to reality, last year Burgess was not out of contract, he was a year off been out of contract, and was happy in his game. That was when in Leeds control was the opportunity to offer a new contract. They didn't.

Early this season Burgess was by far our form prop. He did an interview in the YEP where he stated that he was playing for a new contract. He wasn't offered a new contract.

Since then he was dropped, and despite his replacements not putting in the requied level of performance he has not had a look in. He has now asked for a release from his current contract to enable him to play first team. At the same time he has implied that he "may" now go to Australia at the end of the season when out of contract.

This is all not too dissimilar to when Lee Smith went. The club never got round to offering him a contract, they should have offered it a year earlier when he was asking for it, and when he was at the top of the game, but didn't. Smith left, then the club came back cap in hand realising their error.

Think it's all a bit strange. Not a good sign unless an awesome signing in comng in!

Only a few players constitue as an awesome signing such as: Benji Marshall, Inglis, Hayne, so be prepared to be dissapointed

Come on Andy, nothing should surprise you on here any more. Don't you know, a player who has expressed a long held desire to leave Leeds and who refused a new conrtact is every reason to get het up at GH for not making him stay!!!!!

"You have nothing to back up that we offered him a new contract. You have nothing to back up that he turned down a new contract"

Sound familiar?

And yet here you are not five minutes later, stating as fact what Leeds did and didn't do and what Luke Burgess did and didn't want.

You can't have it both ways.

I guess the hint re Burgess is in the wording of the statement made

"His demands to leave "

quite a strong wording when you think about it?

Thanks pal but my player gauge is well calibrated.

Those players you mentioned will never play in SL

Awesome would be shilington, kaufusi?

Is it just me that gets more excited about the potential appearance of a player like Stevie Ward or one of his contemporaries in the 1st time than some Antipodean over here for all the wrong reasons?

It doesn't sound familiar at all Andy. You are getting your wires crossed.

I know for an absolute fact that Burgess has not been offered a new deal from Leeds. I also know as an absolute fact that Burgess has made no definate plans yet on leaving the country at the end of the year.

Like it's been said, he has a strrong desire to go and probably will, but nothing is in place yet. His mum does not want to go, and neither he or his brother (who also has a desire to go) want to leave her alone. The only way they are going is if she does.

No, and had we had a antipodean in the positions Ward plays you might have a point.

But then again usually you keep banging on about staying loyal to past it players, who ironically are holding back the development of players like Stevie Ward.

So what exatly do you want?

I'm interested to see what Leeds intend doing with Ward as regards his best position.

He's more a runner than a ball player, although he does have decent hands (think Paul Sculthorpe and you get the idea). Been all over the place in the age groups at Leeds though - 6, 13 and second row IIRC.

Longer term, he's probably a replacement for Sinfield but it will necessitate Leeds changing the way they play to accommodate a running loose forward rather than a playmaker. Short term, is his physical development far enough advanced that he can cope with playing second row?

Stevie Ward has not been held back. He's being handled perfectly. He's in the middle of his exams and is very young. I'd hope to see him be gradually introduced to 1st team over the next couple of years and, if goes well be a regular by 2014.

And I've never suggested we be loyal to "past it players".

If it doesn't sound familiar, then you've got short term memory issues...

It would appear then that you (and only you) are in possession of these "absolute facts"? I presume these have come either directly from Luke himself in that case, or from Gary Hetherington? Which is it?

I'd imagine if we don't chuck him in the 1st team in the next 2 weeks Gotcha will claim we've held him back out of loyalty to a past it Sinfield.

Extremely happy to see Cross go.

Complete opposite for Burgess. He's been one of our best props this season, I don't understand why McDermott doesn't play him? Something has gone on behind the scenes I think...

Andy, his reference to the Burgess's mother's role in this evidences to me that Gotcha has absolutely no facts whatsoever and no understanding of the Burgess' family dynamics. He couldn't be wider of the mark.

It's not for sharing on here but I'll tell you Monday.

There is not only me and me only in possession of these "absolute facts". Take it as a guarantee though, both existing UK brothers will not be in Aus next year unless their mum goes, no matter what the desires or rumours are.

And what do you have to "back up"?